Interim Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 24
Civ Suit29/24
SMT. MITHLESH JAIN Vs. JITENDER SINGH YADAV @
JEETU
28.05.2024
Present: Sh. Vipin Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff.
Sh. Deepak Mishra, Ld. Counsel for the Defendant.
Vide this order I shall decide an application U/o 7
Rule 11 CPC. The present suit has been filed for recovery of
possession/ejectment, recovery of rent, mesne profits and
damages.
It is stated in the plaint that plaintiff is owner of
property bearing no. D-10. Gali No. 2, Sanjay Mohalla,
Bhajanpura, Delhi-53 (hereinafter referred to as suit property).
The first floor of the suit property was let out to the defendant as
a tenant in the month of June 2021. Defendant has not been
paying his rent. Therefore, the tenancy of the defendant was
terminated and the present suit has been filed for ejectment of the
defendant and for recovery of arrears of rent, mesne profit and
damages.
The present application has been filed on the ground
that the plaintiff is claiming ownership on the basis of GPA,
Agreement to Sell, payment receipt, Will deed etc. which cannot
be considered as valid ownership documents in favour of
plaintiff.
Another ground taken by the defendant is that
another suit is pending before the court of Ld. ADJ, NE/KKD for
same cause of action therfore the present suit is liable to be
rejected.
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
Per contra, Ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff vehemently
opposes the application.
Heard. Record perused.
Perusal of the record shows that, in the plaint itself it
has clearly been mentioned that defendant was inducted as a
tenant in the first floor of the suit property and he had illegally
taken over the possession of the ground floor as well as the
second floor of the suit property for which separate suit for
possession has been filed by the plaintiff. The same appears to
be a separate cause of action. Therefore, the arguments of Ld.
Counsel for the defendant is liable to be rejected.
The title documents produced by the plaintiff
whether confer any title on the plaintiff or not as alleged shall be
seen after the same are taken into evidence.
In view of the above discussion, application U/o 7
Rule 11 CPC filed on behalf of the defendant stands dismissed.
Put up for framing of issues on 15.07.2024.
RINKU JAIN
ACJ-cum-ARC-cum-CCJ
North-East/Karkardooma Courts,
Delhi/28.05.2024
-- 2 of 2 --